It's tempting to join the hordes of people casting stones at Brian Williams. And why not? As the list of charges (embellished accounts of events, skewed news reports, and perhaps even flat-out falsehoods) grows against the suspended NBC news anchor, it's hard to defend a journalist who has mixed facts and fiction--all, apparently, to make himself appear more important.
Clearly, Williams screwed up. He violated perhaps the most basic (and sacred) tenets of journalism--truth and trust. No matter what they're reporting, journalists bank on being taken at their word. They ask readers, viewers, and listeners to believe that their account of the news is factual and accurate. While journalists make mistakes at times (they are, after all, human), no good reporter deliberately distorts facts or misleads his or her audience.
But is that what Williams did? Yes and no. As the investigation into his reporting unfolds, it would appear that Williams routinely displayed a penchant for "Wish-I'd-been-there" journalism. He reported being in places he wasn't (aboard a helicopter struck by a grenade over Iraq); witnessing things he didn't (a suicide in the New Orleans Super Dome following Hurricane Katrina); and meeting people (the Pope) he never actually encountered.
Notice that all of these moments--and others like them--involved himself. No one is disputing that Williams covered the Iraq War, reported on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, or attended Catholic University during a Papal visit. Nor is anyone suggesting that his coverage of important news stories was grossly inaccurate. In fact, it would appear that his detailed accounts of events was essentially truthful.
But many are taking issue with his presentation of his own actions in these stories. His critics charge that he placed himself at the center of stories, sometimes when he was nowhere near them. If Williams did indeed misrepresent himself, casting himself as an eyewitness to the fall of the Berlin Wall, for example, shame on him. As a reporter, he should know better; he should also know that journalists are never THE story, no matter how much they might wish they were.
But while such behavior is hardly admirable, Williams is by no means the only "sinner" in the profession. More than a few journalists--especially when in front of a camera--have trouble remembering that their role is to report the story, not to distract audiences or influence their perceptions of it. How many modern news anchors betray their objectivity by rolling their eyes at key moments, allowing facial expressions to communicate their reaction to a story, grilling sources with all of the histrionics of a "Law and Order" attorney, or sensationalizing stories that don't deserve to be? How many journalists, when reporting on a snowstorm, a crime, a serious accident, or something already fairly dramatic, use their body language or tone of voice to make the events at hand seem all the more exciting?
The fault, in part at least, is ours. Not only do we want to be informed by reporters, we want to be entertained by them. We no longer want the news presented by Walter Cronkite types. Instead, we want to hear from TV reporters with a flair for the dramatic.
We want to see reporters shrouded in snow, being buffeted by hurricane winds, or walking us down an alley where moments earlier a thief eluded police. We want to follow a swashbuckling young Geraldo as he barges into a government office (accompanied by a camera crew) and thrusts a microphone in the face of some bureaucrat. Such moments may be okay journalism, but they clearly have an element of entertainment. And while most correspondents stop short of fabricating stories about their exploits, they also recognize (along with their network chiefs) that "drama" sells.
Some of Williams's colleagues at NBC have commented on his fondness for stories. It would appear that on more than a few occasions Williams wove elements of fiction, at least regarding himself, into his reporting. While the journalism profession clearly needs to take him to task for this behavior, it should also take a close look at its own assumptions about what constitutes good reporting. Journalists don't have to showmen, personalities, or characters. Nor do they need to stretch the truth about the stories they report or, for that matter, exaggerate about themselves.
How about we let talk show hosts embellish and entertain--and let reporters just report?
No comments:
Post a Comment